[Gene Econ]

Guys:

Interesting comparisons of the RPG and the AT-4. Brought back memories of armor / anti-armor net assessments and the various testings that occured.

Just to clarify and not correct. Liners are part of the cone of the shape charge. The liner inverts when the shape charge inverts on detonation and generally takes on a kind of metal plasma form. It gives a bit more kinetic energy to the chemical energy if there is a way of putting it. The whole mess burns through the armor. Pyrophoric effect, if I got that one spelled right. It has been about fifteen years since I messed with that stuff.

Don't confuse liners for shape charges with 'fire formed' penetrators either. Explosive Formed aka 'Fire Formed' are kinetic energy although the penetrator was formed from chemical energy. He, he, he. I was involved with more than a few experiments with EFPs.

Caution on being impressed by things penetrating X amount of RHA. No modern tank uses RHA anymore and laminated armor is mostly intended to defeat long rod penetrators but also assists in defeating chemical energy as the density of the armor changes. I think I can say this as pretty much a fact these days that the use of RHA as a standard for penetration is obsolete -- not generally used when discussing anti armor weapons as it represents a consistent standard for modeling and laminated armor doesn't.

So far, from my understanding, there has only been one incident of a supposed RPG penetrating the hull armor of an M-1 Tank. The Army still isn't sure it was an RPG though and honestly, no one knows but it did penetrate the skirt and went through the side of the tank above one of its wheels. No casualties.

Another thing that has been brought out but is important to know is that slight angles of obliquity have dramatic effects on penetration for both shape charges and kinetic energy weapons. I think that five or ten degrees of obliquity cancels out about fifty percent of the effect right off the bat.

From what I understan, shape charges still need a stand off roughly equal to the length of the chemical cone. Thus the shape of the RPG warhead no doubt. Reactive will work on RPGs. We just don't need reactive as the armor packages on our armored vehicles are sufficient to defeat most hand held AT weapons. I am not talking about Hellfire missles or the like and I bet a Javelin would destroy an M-1 as it is top attack. Oh yes, if you ever saw one reactive tile go off, you would understand why the Army doesn't want to use them.

As a note -- many Stryker Vehicles with the 1/25th SBCT have taken numerous hits with RPGs and so far I think only one or two have received catastrophic kills as a result. Obliquity angles, a significant 'RPG Screen' (cage) and applique armor tiles have allowed these vehicles to take serious RPG hits and keep on moving down the road. It is the kamakazi car and truck bombs that have destroyed Strykers.

I also got involved in hyper velocity KE to an extent. Very difficult to deal with stability at hyper velocities and more difficult to get the projo going at hyper velocity. When I left that world, there still wasn't a definition for hyper velocity. It started at 10K fps but as technology couldn't push a dart that fast, the system started watering down its standards. When I left, it was down to 8K fps.

How's that for three years of my life? That and a dollar gets me a cup of PX coffee. Did have some good times watching experiments though.

Gene